You have to offend more than one person to get (and stay) modded down in
That's not quite true. You only need to offend one person to get modded down. However, if you also provide value, then you will probably not stay modded down. My karma has only been anywhere other than right up against the kap a couple of times in the last... uh, long time.
Agree. Sometimes my notifications are a war zone, with up and down mods. back and forth.
I mean have you seen the shit they didn't ban people for?
I mean have you seen the thing where Zuckerfuck called people who trusted him enough to give him their personal info for facebook "dumb fucks"? You should expect Facebook to intentionally not ban the worst people, if you are familiar with what a piece of shit Mark Fuckerberg is.
Yes, I've seen downright seditious and threatening ov violent harm in a few groups, and the person suffers no consequence. Someone might have reported you for just having a different opinion. When spring outside of an echo chamber, people in the echo chamber go Reeee!
Especially if you answer certain groups who appear to enjoy "punishing" those who disagree with them. Some even enjoy the experience.
Ban it for them.
I recall as a rebellious 13 year old, I started smoking. Developed a 2+ pack a day habit. Started drinking. It wasn't because I enjoyed it all that much, but it was an adult thing, and forbidden. Turned 19 and quit. Wasn't fun any more. Now it's coffee, and the occasional wee dram of a good bourbon or perhaps tequila on date night with the missus.
But now there is a new "adult" thing for the kids.
It is not to say that social media is not bad for them. It certainly is. That shit is ruining prople, ruining relationships, and spreading lies and disseminating malware. But banning it is certainly an enticement for the kids.
You could chalk it up as a shared cultural reference instead of an actual joke
You have to offend more than one person to get (and stay) modded down in
I know, right?
IDK man, there is one type of person that complains about being unfairly targeted wit these bans. If you got banned, its probably obvious. I mean have you seen the shit they didn't ban people for?
I suppose you could just claim I'm making shit up. I'm not complaining about being targeted unfairly, but allow me to explain.
If you get banned, then whine about it, saying "They're so mean!" That is complaining about being unfairly targeted. Exactly.
I noted I was, then surmising what I might have done wrong. In your world, is everyone of one mind? And all thinking in lockstep? And that any decision among all would be the same? Perhaps you live in an alternative universe of puppy dogs and rainbows. In the real universe, there are differing opinions. Sometimes certain opinions are prioritized.
Bloody hell, there are a fair number of people In here who would love to have me banned from Slashdot. Although I seldom swear, some find themselves violently disagreeing with me - I even have a few stalkers, who mod me down when I post objective truth. So you're claiming I am dissembling, or posting violent threats or whatever you made up in your head that I'm omitting for - what - internet pity? That's rather amusing.
I'm in Fb jail right now, presumably for my political views, but they haven't actually told me what comment was problematic.
For it's many faults, at least slashdot the platform isn't known for opposing free speech like that
Back before Youtube became a little more inclusive I got banned from an address, and they wouldn't say why. As far as I can tell, it was a post I made about some women seem to always pick abusive mates. I must have been reported for that. Unfortunately, that is an objective truth. But not one that was politically correct at the time. So I pissed off someone that made a complaint, and that complaint landed on a person who shared that. Or maybe an algorithm issue - who knows?
https://www.psychologytoday.co....
And yes, Slashdot's moderation method, which allows people to mod posts up or down, then allows users to block out posts below a certain level is the best moderation concept ever.
Let's be very clear, mass surveillance is exactly what this is.
1. It's being sold under the guise of license plate tracking (also in TFS), but there are Flock cameras installed in places where there is not a road in sight, such as in parks and on playgrounds.
Not certain where to put this in, but has anyone else noticed that license plates are getting a little bland? https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/im.... In real life, the liberty bell is much more subdued. And many other states are switching to what has to be a lot more easily scanned.
The irony is a plate that is designed to be surveilled has "Let Freedom Ring" on it.
And the "AI Slop" button is already being used to silence voices someone doesn't agree with. You see, when you click the button, it's removed from your feed and sent off for human review (yeah right, more likely it's an AI reviewing it and then, maybe, a human)
It's a little like in here. I'll post objective truth, but since I pissed off someone that week that got some mod points, I get modded down. At least on Slashdot, it doesn't disappear.
Master Control Program, as played by the most excellent Ed Dillinger
A classic heist trick too, nobody checks the plumber's toolbags (in the movies). Worked for Ocean's Eleven and The A-Team.
I've long said that a company - especially one involved with essential infrastructure, should have a head of IT with C-Suite level authority. And the compliance chops to go with it. And while small companies - water in this case - might not have the money to hire such a person,
The water companies aren't just regular everyday companies selling product/service to customers. A lot of what they can and must do are government mandated. Including pricing.
They can't normally just up pricing to cover all that extra stuff without state approval. Sometimes even worse the city or state requires the public to vote on such things (although I don't know if that's the case here)
With normal companies, short sighted spending (or lack of it) tends to solve itself, but any in bed with the government have to deal with being between a rock and a hard place.
Then it is an unsolvable problem, and people will be harmed. It's a pity that there aer easily solvable problems for some that have no possible solution for others.
Nope. If it is connected to the Internet incompetently, the security will eventually be found to suck. You are stuck in the paradigm from 20-30 years ago.
You know - I'm amazed at how many in here - a site supposedly of the computer savvy - think that if you are on the internet at all, you are pwned. Using good security (and no, Windows Defender and Firewall is obviously not good security) you can be pretty safe.
And before anyone chimes in on how no internet facing system is safe, it is true that if it can be written, it can be compromised. But that's not the point. The point is that about 70 percent of setups have piss-poor security. So the hackers go after the low hanging fruit. Why hack a strong system when there are three times as many just inviting pwnage?
Biden right now, today as we speak, is more cognitively coherent than Trump.
Here's the challenge: Submit a video clip of Donald Trump discussing a topic, policy or issue and demonstrating a cohesive understanding of it, where he shows he's done the reading, absorbed the information and speak about it in an intelligent manner.
Anything at all, please submit. Should be easy right, he's the President.
I disagree. The connection to the Internet is not the problem. The complete lack of competently done IT Security is. IT Security done right is up to the task today.
This. The bad guys and gals go after the low hanging fruit. And there is so. damned. much. of. it.
I've long said that a company - especially one involved with essential infrastructure, should have a head of IT with C-Suite level authority. And the compliance chops to go with it.
And while small companies - water in this case - might not have the money to hire such a person, if they have to use software, it comes from somewhere. So "somewhere" needs to be responsible and in the loop. If that's too much a problem, expect more and nastier coordinate cyberattacks. Perhaps dumping the entire inventory of chlorination or flouridation chemicals in short order, or turning it off altogether, issuing false alerts, or suppressing them.
If no one was harmed by this event, perhaps those in charge should consider it a shot across the bow.
It is your destiny. - Darth Vader
